Ranvindra Rajak Alias Ravindra Kumar Rajak v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.3904 of 2024 ====================================================== 1.

Ranvindra Rajak Alias Ravindra Kumar Rajak Son of Kameshwar Rajak Resident of Mohalla- Prabhat Colony, P.S.- K. Hat, District- Purnea. 2.

Devendra Nath Jha Son of Bidya Nath Jha Resident of Mohalla- Prabhat Colony, P.S.- K. Hat, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar.

2.

The Principal Secretary, Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Govt. of Bihar.

3.

The District Magistrate, Purnea.

4.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Purnea, District- Purnea. 5.

The Circle Officer, Purnea East, District- Purnea. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ram Prawesh Kumar, Adv.

For the State :

Mr Narendra Kumar Singh, AC to GP-22 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 16-12-2024 Though the present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notice dated 16.11.2023, issued by the Circle Officer, Purnea East, District-Purnea, i.e. the Respondent No. 5, in connection with Encroachment Case no. 6 of 2023-24, however, at the outset, the learned counsel for the RespondentState submits, by referring to the counter affidavit filed in the present case that the Respondent No. 5 has already passed the final order, under Section 6(1) of the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1956"), on 4.1.2024, hence, in case the petitioners are so aggrieved they

Patna High Court CWJC No.3904 of 2024(3) dt.16-12-2024 2/2 may file an appeal under Section 11 of the Act, 1956. 2.

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioners to challenge the aforesaid order dated 4.1.2024, by filing appropriate appeal under Section 11 of the Act, 1956, however, seeks some protection during the interregnum period. Liberty, so sought, is granted.

3.

It is needless to state that for a period of four weeks from today, status quo, existing as on today qua the land/houses of the petitioners in question, shall be maintained, in order to enable them to file appropriate appeal and seek interim relief. 4.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off on the aforesaid terms.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U